Re:Software Licenses and Failed States
by icebraining on Wednesday May 18, 2016 @05:04PM
(#11725953)
GitHub's terms of use require that public repositories contain only open source code
Well, they require that you grant a license to view and fork the code, but nothing else. It's not clear what "fork" entails, though.
I have dev peers who think like that and they release code into the public domain.
I totally buy the idea that at least some users who upload source to GitHub without a license feel that way. I have slightly different priorities (creating software that is used is more important to me than avoiding the copyright antics) but I'm pretty sympathetic to that sentiment.
The problem with expressing that sentiment by not licensing your software is that it doesn't express that sentiment at all, especially on GitHub. GitHub's terms of use require that public repositories contain only open source code, so there's an argument to be made that uploading your code to a public repo on GitHub implies an open source license.
If you really want to make a civilly-disobedient statement rejecting the idea of licenses, I'd do so with something like the Forget Users License[1].
[1] https://www.kerkeslager.com/forget-users-license.txt
EDIT: I'm not a lawyer and would love to make this more lawyer-y. Suggested improvements to the license are welcome.